Political Discussion

[GoingDown]

I would if I could. Horse and buggies use to be the transportation of choice. Some day auto's will go the way of buggies. Cities such as Denver, Portland and certain extent the Twin Cities are offering alternative transportation choices for those who want to lose the auto.

I wish the general public knew that this is how the environmentalist movement feels about this situation.

Maybe people would wake up and realize what a threat it is to their standard of living and their way of life.

I'm very familiar with Portland, Oregon. Public transportation is very efficient there and you can get by without a car. But if you want to leave Portland, and say go down to Lincoln City and spend the day at the beach and then come right back home, good luck if you don't have a car. The freedom to move around is a big part of what it means to be American.

We're not serfs, bound to the land.

[GoingDown]

BTW, one can watch the video and come to a different conclusion than you.

Yeah, but admit it. You didn't even watch it, did you?

[GoingDown]

So, let's see... I have no takers on the fact that Canada pulled out of Kyoto?

No one wants to discuss that?

That's a big one.



Here's the website again, in case you missed it...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/12/12/kyoto-protocol-canada-withdrawing_n_1144410.html

One part I forgot to mention was this...

"Europe has made up the bulk of the emissions reductions, and collectively, industrialized countries are on track to achieve the Kyoto goal of reducing their emissions by at least 5.2 percent over 1990 levels. But much of the decrease in emissions is attributed to the collapse of East European and Russian economies in the post-Soviet era, as well as to the current global recession, which has helped to reduce industrial output and overall energy use in many countries."

So, in essence, in order to meet these environmentalist's goals, the worldwide economy must stay in depression mode forever? Does that sound good to you?

[msm859]

Floods, droughts, and hurricanes are nothing new for the United States. The Dust Bowl comes to mind as an example. The difference is that we are more densely populated than ever, so when a hurricane makes landfall it is far more likely to hit where people live and destroy their buildings. Same thing with tornadoes. A tornado that touches down in a corn field doesn't get reported by the media, but when we build over the corn field with houses and then a tornado comes through and wipes them out, suddenly it becomes big news. The floods happen every year to people who unwisely built their homes in flood plains. Unfortunately, there are huge parts of the country east of the Rockies like that, and so when big rain storms roll in, they get flooded. It even happens here in Arizona. Just last year there was a story about a community that built most of their houses in a dry wash. They were fine for about a decade, and then suddenly a large enough rain storm came in and completely flooded their houses. They were so upset, but what I kept wondering was what were they thinking when they purposely chose to build their houses that close to a dry wash? Did they think it was never going to rain again?The droughts and floods are increasing because of climate change and that is going to cost all of us.

I agree with you about the wars in the middle east. If I had my way, I would bring all of our military home from the middle east and let those people fight themselves till the end of time, if that's what they want to do. Just leave us out of it. We get most of our oil from North America. We are fighting those wars for Europe to have a stable oil supply. A mistake in my opinion. If we could open up Anwar in Alaska, and drill everywhere there is oil and natural gas in the lower 48 and in the oceans surrounding us, and use coal and nuclear for electricy we would be energy independent. We are the Saudi Arabia of coal and natural gas. The E.P.A. just won't let us use it.If we drilled all of our known reserves for oil and used 100% of it for domestic consumption it would last about 8 years

I and most of my customers hate those CFL light bulbs. They don't put out the same quality nor quantity of light as the old incandescents bulbs once did, and they have mercury, so they are toxic. The new ones are made in China (who burns coal for power) and they simply don't last as long as they once did. Some of the packages say they are supposed to last 10 years, but we're lucky if we get a few years out of them, but they cost so much more because they are supposed to last so much longer. Once again, it is another example of how the environmentalist movement makes everything more expensive, but at the same time it lowers the standard of living.CFL's were transitional we are now going to LED's that can give you whatever light you want

And don't you think that if there was some alternative for fossil fuels that actually worked, we would already know about it and be using it right now? Unfortunately, there is nothing practical even on the horizon. Solar and wind are pretty much worthless at least half the time. Even if that was true, getting 1/2 our electricity from renewables is a good start My challenge for the environmentalists is this-- give us something practical to jump to, and I will. Natural gas Until then, stay out of the way. Don't make everything more expensive and lower the standard of living for people like me.

With the wave of his magical pen he just doubled the fleet mpg requirement? And how do you think they will meet that requirement? Mostly electric cars which are almost worthless. Chevrolet Volt is already averaging over 100mpg in real use. My son bought one 1 month ago despite a number of long distance trips - picked it up at home town and drove 500 miles he is averaging over 80 mpg. His 40 mile work commute he uses zero gas. A lot more plug ins are on line to be released The batteries don't last very long and are toxic waste. You can't complain about toxic waste from batteries if you are not worried about toxic waste from nuclear plants And where does the electricity come from? There will be more and more demands for electricity and the E.P.A. is closing down more and more coal plants.

And more and more plants are being converted to natural gas. Apple just built a huge data center in North Carolina that will be virtually run 100% on solar along with a natural gas hydrogen plant - zero carbon foot print. The technology is here today. You keep on talking up coal, why? Natural gas is 1/3 the pollution and close to the same price - and as you say we have plenty of it. You complain about China then let's stop exporting coal to them, lets not build the Keystone pipeline were all of the dirty tarsands is going to China. Why do we want to help China have cheap energy? We can make things more expensive for them and therefore reduce their carbon foot print and help us compete with them.

[helpmeout]

Yeah, but admit it. You didn't even watch it, did you?

Yes, I did. Along with other videos regarding Chernobyl.

[GoingDown]

I'm going to respond to the above posts later on, but I'm in a hurry because I have to get ready to go over to a cousin's home for lunch.

I just wanted to touch on this light bulb controversy and how it shows exactly what I am saying about the environmentalist movement.

The government is trying to impose a solution on us from the top down for a problem which really didn't need to be solved, rather than allowing us consumers to decide for ourselves what we want to do.

Incandescent bulbs are simple, cheap, and effective. They did not need to be replaced. If we want to pay more for CFLS or LED lights, that has always been our choice, but most of us hated them. I hate them. My customers hate them. They are ugly and they put out inferior light. They're more expensive and yet don't last as long as they claim.

Here are some price comparisons for you for light bulbs which supposedly put out the equivalent of a 75 watt soft white bulb.

Incandescent: $1.47 for a 4 pack of 75 watt bulbs.

http://www.homedepot.com/Electrical-Light-Bulbs-Incandescents-Light-Bulbs/h_d1/N-5yc1vZbmglZ1z0xeui/R-202326811/h_d2/ProductDisplay?catalogId=10053&langId=-1&storeId=10051#.UF9WfK7UA3U

CFL: $7.97 for a 4 pack 75 watt equivalent light output

http://www.homedepot.com/Electrical-Light-Bulbs-CFL-Light-Bulbs/h_d1/N-5yc1vZbmatZ1z0xeui/R-100687003/h_d2/ProductDisplay?catalogId=10053&langId=-1&storeId=10051#.UF9Wwq7UA3U

LED: $34.88 for a 2 pack of 60 watt equivalent light output (I couldn't find 75 watt output yet)

http://www.homedepot.com/Electrical-Light-Bulbs-LED-Light-Bulbs/h_d1/N-5yc1vZbm79Z1z0xeuiZ1z0xeui/R-203630147/h_d2/ProductDisplay?catalogId=10053&langId=-1&storeId=10051#.UF9ZKa7UA3U

Do you see what's about to happen here?

Your costs for light bulb replacement are about to go through the roof.

And yes, they claim they will last nearly forever, but we all know they won't. CFLs at first would last for years and years of use, but lately, if they last 2 to 3 years, you're lucky. They have cheapened the quality of them, but the price is still high.

And the quality of light just isn't the same. With the old incandescent lights, my customers were able to dim them down and they looked great-- almost like candles-- in chandeliers and such things as that. While some CFLs are dimmable, they just don't put out the same kind of light. Their light is ugly.

So, they crammed this down our throat against our will, what's next?

Maybe they will tell us that all new thermostats will be set so that we can't set our air conditioner to come on below 85 degrees? And maybe in the winter, it will be pre-set to only turn on the heater once the indoor temp gets down to 40 degrees? I don't like where this is headed.

Our standard of living is falling and the cost of everything is going up-- artificially.

Other parts of the world are still going to use incandescent light bulbs. The Western countries are artificially imposing this on ourselves.

Do any of you really think light bulbs are going to make that much of a difference to emissions? I wire houses and the big wires are the ones used in air conditioning, heating, cooking, and heating water. You know if they did this to our light bulbs, they will be coming for the biggest users of electricity in our homes next.

[msm859]

I'm going to respond to the above posts later on, but I'm in a hurry because I have to get ready to go over to a cousin's home for lunch.

I just wanted to touch on this light bulb controversy and how it shows exactly what I am saying about the environmentalist movement.

The government is trying to impose a solution on us from the top down for a problem which really didn't need to be solved, rather than allowing us consumers to decide for ourselves what we want to do.

Incandescent bulbs are simple, cheap, and effective. They did not need to be replaced. If we want to pay more for CFLS or LED lights, that has always been our choice, but most of us hated them. I hate them. My customers hate them. They are ugly and they put out inferior light. They're more expensive and yet don't last as long as they claim.

Here are some price comparisons for you for light bulbs which supposedly put out the equivalent of a 75 watt soft white bulb.

Incandescent: $1.47 for a 4 pack of 75 watt bulbs.

http://www.homedepot.com/Electrical-Light-Bulbs-Incandescents-Light-Bulbs/h_d1/N-5yc1vZbmglZ1z0xeui/R-202326811/h_d2/ProductDisplay?catalogId=10053&langId=-1&storeId=10051#.UF9WfK7UA3U

CFL: $7.97 for a 4 pack 75 watt equivalent light output

http://www.homedepot.com/Electrical-Light-Bulbs-CFL-Light-Bulbs/h_d1/N-5yc1vZbmatZ1z0xeui/R-100687003/h_d2/ProductDisplay?catalogId=10053&langId=-1&storeId=10051#.UF9Wwq7UA3U

LED: $34.88 for a 2 pack of 60 watt equivalent light output (I couldn't find 75 watt output yet)

http://www.homedepot.com/Electrical-Light-Bulbs-LED-Light-Bulbs/h_d1/N-5yc1vZbm79Z1z0xeuiZ1z0xeui/R-203630147/h_d2/ProductDisplay?catalogId=10053&langId=-1&storeId=10051#.UF9ZKa7UA3U

Do you see what's about to happen here?

Your costs for light bulb replacement are about to go through the roof.

And yes, they claim they will last nearly forever, but we all know they won't. CFLs at first would last for years and years of use, but lately, if they last 2 to 3 years, you're lucky. They have cheapened the quality of them, but the price is still high.

And the quality of light just isn't the same. With the old incandescent lights, my customers were able to dim them down and they looked great-- almost like candles-- in chandeliers and such things as that. While some CFLs are dimmable, they just don't put out the same kind of light. Their light is ugly.

So, they crammed this down our throat against our will, what's next?

Maybe they will tell us that all new thermostats will be set so that we can't set our air conditioner to come on below 85 degrees? And maybe in the winter, it will be pre-set to only turn on the heater once the indoor temp gets down to 40 degrees? I don't like where this is headed.

Our standard of living is falling and the cost of everything is going up-- artificially.

Other parts of the world are still going to use incandescent light bulbs. The Western countries are artificially imposing this on ourselves.

Do any of you really think light bulbs are going to make that much of a difference to emissions? Yes - it is called death by a thousand cuts I wire houses and the big wires are the ones used in air conditioning, heating, cooking, and heating water. You know if they did this to our light bulbs, they will be coming for the biggest users of electricity in our homes next.

If you ran the total costs of incandescent vs led -- led wins. http://www.fivestarcleanenergy.com/p...energy-savings
You can adjust the costs they use for the ones you cite and led still wins. I built my house 8 years ago and used almost all CFL's - some are still working. However, as they go everything is being replaced with led. And yes, doing a lot of little things really add up to energy savings.

[jacko]

There use to be lead in gasoline, paint and other products until the bad ol gov't said no more. The whole point about home energy efficiency is to cut down on the number of future power plants needed which are huge capital costs. You are correct, prices are up on commodity products.

I'm going to respond to the above posts later on, but I'm in a hurry because I have to get ready to go over to a cousin's home for lunch.

I just wanted to touch on this light bulb controversy and how it shows exactly what I am saying about the environmentalist movement.

The government is trying to impose a solution on us from the top down for a problem which really didn't need to be solved, rather than allowing us consumers to decide for ourselves what we want to do.

Incandescent bulbs are simple, cheap, and effective. They did not need to be replaced. If we want to pay more for CFLS or LED lights, that has always been our choice, but most of us hated them. I hate them. My customers hate them. They are ugly and they put out inferior light. They're more expensive and yet don't last as long as they claim.

Here are some price comparisons for you for light bulbs which supposedly put out the equivalent of a 75 watt soft white bulb.

Incandescent: $1.47 for a 4 pack of 75 watt bulbs.

http://www.homedepot.com/Electrical-Light-Bulbs-Incandescents-Light-Bulbs/h_d1/N-5yc1vZbmglZ1z0xeui/R-202326811/h_d2/ProductDisplay?catalogId=10053&langId=-1&storeId=10051#.UF9WfK7UA3U

CFL: $7.97 for a 4 pack 75 watt equivalent light output

http://www.homedepot.com/Electrical-Light-Bulbs-CFL-Light-Bulbs/h_d1/N-5yc1vZbmatZ1z0xeui/R-100687003/h_d2/ProductDisplay?catalogId=10053&langId=-1&storeId=10051#.UF9Wwq7UA3U

LED: $34.88 for a 2 pack of 60 watt equivalent light output (I couldn't find 75 watt output yet)

http://www.homedepot.com/Electrical-Light-Bulbs-LED-Light-Bulbs/h_d1/N-5yc1vZbm79Z1z0xeuiZ1z0xeui/R-203630147/h_d2/ProductDisplay?catalogId=10053&langId=-1&storeId=10051#.UF9ZKa7UA3U

Do you see what's about to happen here?

Your costs for light bulb replacement are about to go through the roof.

And yes, they claim they will last nearly forever, but we all know they won't. CFLs at first would last for years and years of use, but lately, if they last 2 to 3 years, you're lucky. They have cheapened the quality of them, but the price is still high.

And the quality of light just isn't the same. With the old incandescent lights, my customers were able to dim them down and they looked great-- almost like candles-- in chandeliers and such things as that. While some CFLs are dimmable, they just don't put out the same kind of light. Their light is ugly.

So, they crammed this down our throat against our will, what's next?

Maybe they will tell us that all new thermostats will be set so that we can't set our air conditioner to come on below 85 degrees? And maybe in the winter, it will be pre-set to only turn on the heater once the indoor temp gets down to 40 degrees? I don't like where this is headed.

Our standard of living is falling and the cost of everything is going up-- artificially.

Other parts of the world are still going to use incandescent light bulbs. The Western countries are artificially imposing this on ourselves.

Do any of you really think light bulbs are going to make that much of a difference to emissions? I wire houses and the big wires are the ones used in air conditioning, heating, cooking, and heating water. You know if they did this to our light bulbs, they will be coming for the biggest users of electricity in our homes next.

[GoingDown]

MSM859: "The droughts and floods are increasing because of climate change and that is going to cost all of us."

Phoenix got its name from the mythical Phoenix bird which rose from its own ashes because the modern city is built upon the ancient remains of a Native American civilization which had to move away because of a drought which went on for so many years they could no longer survive in this area. That was not caused by humans burning gasoline and coal. Such things were not used by humans at that point in time. These things just happen. Weather changes back and forth, and there is really nothing we puny humans can do about it. To artificially lower our standard of living will do nothing but make our lives less enjoyable.

"The Hohokam (“the people who have gone”) were a band of Native Americans who inhabited the Phoenix area probably between 300 and 1400 AD. The Hohokam used the Salt River Valley to create an extensive system of farms and permanent settlements. It is believed that these Native Americans left the area due to a period of severe drought around 1400 AD."


MSM859: "If we drilled all of our known reserves for oil and used 100% of it for domestic consumption it would last about 8 years"

It depends upon who you talk to about this. Environmentalist like to use that figure, but I have heard experts in the oil industry say we have about 200 years of oil left in North America if we were allowed to drill everywhere there is oil in North America. If there was truly only 8 years of oil left here, it wouldn't make sense from a business perspective for the oil industry to even want to gear up their industry to go after it. They wouldn't even be interested in such a small amount.


MSM859: ".CFL's were transitional we are now going to LED's that can give you whatever light you want"

Have you seen the horrid light these LEDs put out? It is nothing like incandescent lights. It's even worse than CFL light in terms of what it looks like. It's like something you would use in a haunted house at Halloween. I believe in freedom of choice. We as consumers should have the right to choose what lights we want to use. But the environmentalist movement is against freedom of choice.

MSM859: "Even if that was true, getting 1/2 our electricity from renewables is a good start"

Oops! There has been a misunderstanding here. Not even the environmentalist's wildest dreams do wind and solar come anywhere close to producing 50% of our electricity. What I meant was that solar puts out a tiny amount of electricity roughly 50% of the day. It produces nothing at night. Wind turbines only work the wind is blowing, which unfortunately for Arizona anyways, it mainly during the winter months. During the summer, there is very little wind, so when we need the most electricity, they produce next to nothing. Coal plants produce 25 times MORE electricity than solar and wind farms. So, at best, solar and wind produce about 4% of our electricity. Not good, if you like using electricity.



MSM859: "Chevrolet Volt is already averaging over 100mpg in real use. My son bought one 1 month ago despite a number of long distance trips - picked it up at home town and drove 500 miles he is averaging over 80 mpg. His 40 mile work commute he uses zero gas."


FOX News: "Even a $7,500 federal tax credit, which dropped the Volt's sticker price to $33,500, did little to promote sales. The car cost $7,000 more than the Leaf, and $13,000 above a well-equipped compact with a gas engine."

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/leisure/2012/...#ixzz27OUjltEB

Jeez! Even with today's gas prices, $13,000 could buy a lot of gas. So your son (and you) are paying a lot more to be green. And I have no problem with that if that is what you want to do, but I don't like people telling me what to do, and forcing me to pay more for "green" things, when I can barely afford to live with the way things are now.

And more and more plants are being converted to natural gas. Apple just built a huge data center in North Carolina that will be virtually run 100% on solar along with a natural gas hydrogen plant - zero carbon foot print. The technology is here today. You keep on talking up coal, why? Natural gas is 1/3 the pollution and close to the same price - and as you say we have plenty of it. You complain about China then let's stop exporting coal to them, lets not build the Keystone pipeline were all of the dirty tarsands is going to China. Why do we want to help China have cheap energy? We can make things more expensive for them and therefore reduce their carbon foot print and help us compete with them.

I saw that story on 60 Minutes. Did you happen to notice the size of the natural gas pipe coming into the Apple data center? Most of their electricity is still being supplied by natural gas, which according to most environmentalists produces CO2 and is destroying our planet. Eventhough green leafy plants produce CO2 at night, when they switch from photosynthesis to aerobic respiration to meet their own energy needs to make it through the night. I have no problem with Apple doing whatever it wants to do to meet its own energy needs, but I would appreciate it if they would honest about it. Natural gas is supplying their energy needs, and I'm okay with that, but it does leave a carbon footprint. If they had no natural gas pipeline coming into their data center, and they ran everything with solar and wind, then I would say that renewables were an expensive, but viable option. But as you noticed, if you watched the 60 Minutes story, they like to claim to be green to sway the opinion of greenies who buy their products, but in reality, their still relying on good old carbon based energy to supply their building with enough electricity.

That's not what I have heard about the keystone pipeline. What I heard is that Canada was bound by the NAFTA agreement to sell the oil to us, if we built the keystone pipeline, but since we refused to build it, they are going to now build a pipeline across Canada to the Pacific and sell it to China. So, it is still going to be burned whether we burn it or not.

And telling China what it will or will not be allowed to do, won't go very far. They don't care what we think or say about them. They are going to do what is best for their own country, which unfortunately, we rarely do for our own country.

[GoingDown]

If you ran the total costs of incandescent vs led -- led wins. http://www.fivestarcleanenergy.com/p...energy-savings
You can adjust the costs they use for the ones you cite and led still wins. I built my house 8 years ago and used almost all CFL's - some are still working. However, as they go everything is being replaced with led. And yes, doing a lot of little things really add up to energy savings.

That still does nothing to address the issue of the freedom of consumers to choose whatever light bulbs they wish to buy, nor does it address the issue of them producing horrible, ugly light, and their rather ugly appearance-- imagine a beautiful chandelier covered in the ugly CFLs.

Let's just compare the looks for a second here...

This is what my customers want to go in their chandeliers...

http://www.homedepot.com/Electrical-Light-Bulbs-Incandescents-Light-Bulbs/h_d1/N-5yc1vZbmglZ1z0xeud/R-202529952/h_d2/ProductDisplay?catalogId=10053&langId=-1&storeId=10051#.UGBpzq7UA3U

And then, look at how clunky and ugly the CFLs look...

http://www.homedepot.com/Electrical-Light-Bulbs-CFL-Light-Bulbs/h_d1/N-5yc1vZbmatZ1z0xeud/R-100653099/h_d2/ProductDisplay?catalogId=10053&langId=-1&storeId=10051#.UGBqQK7UA3U

They look horrible in a chandelier, and their light is not at all pleasing to my customers, nor to me.

LEDs are still clunky and ugly looking...

http://www.homedepot.com/Electrical-Light-Bulbs-LED-Light-Bulbs/h_d1/N-5yc1vZbm79Z1z0xeud/R-203434258/h_d2/ProductDisplay?catalogId=10053&langId=-1&storeId=10051#.UGBqya7UA3U

It is a matter of tastes, and before you say it doesn't really matter to you, would you want the government choosing what style of clothing you can wear? This is my business. If customers don't like the way something looks when I get finished, they may not pay, or more likely, they will be unlikely to add any new chandeliers to their home or other decorative lights, because what's the point, when they end up looking ugly in the end? In just a few more years, we will no longer be able to get incandescent bulbs at the store, and at that time, I think my business will drop off significantly.

"LED: Life Hours: 18.3 years (based on 3 hrs/day)"

Does LED really win in terms of cost when something that is supposed to last for over a decade only lasts 5 or 6 years? Do you really believe they will last 18 years? I don't. And so, if you are having to replace them every 5 or so years (which is how long I have observed them to last at various customers' homes), at $34.88 for a two pack of bulbs, it will add up significantly.

And for renters like me, and for most people who move every 5 years or so, what are you supposed to do? Take all the light bulbs in the house with you to your new home? I don't think the landlord would be too pleased. They're so expensive, you would be leaving behind a significant amount of money every time you moved. As with all environmentalist changes, it will hit the poor people much harder than rich people, who don't mind paying a lot of money for light bulbs.

And at such high prices, you will also have to do something to secure your outdoor lights, since they will become a target for thieves.

[msm859]

MSM859: "The droughts and floods are increasing because of climate change and that is going to cost all of us."

Phoenix got its name from the mythical Phoenix bird which rose from its own ashes because the modern city is built upon the ancient remains of a Native American civilization which had to move away because of a drought which went on for so many years they could no longer survive in this area. That was not caused by humans burning gasoline and coal. Such things were not used by humans at that point in time. These things just happen. Weather changes back and forth, and there is really nothing we puny humans can do about it. To artificially lower our standard of living will do nothing but make our lives less enjoyable.
I don't think going green means we have to lower our standard of living.
"The Hohokam (“the people who have gone”) were a band of Native Americans who inhabited the Phoenix area probably between 300 and 1400 AD. The Hohokam used the Salt River Valley to create an extensive system of farms and permanent settlements. It is believed that these Native Americans left the area due to a period of severe drought around 1400 AD."


MSM859: "If we drilled all of our known reserves for oil and used 100% of it for domestic consumption it would last about 8 years"

It depends upon who you talk to about this. Environmentalist like to use that figure, but I have heard experts in the oil industry say we have about 200 years of oil left in North America if we were allowed to drill everywhere there is oil in North America. If there was truly only 8 years of oil left here, it wouldn't make sense from a business perspective for the oil industry to even want to gear up their industry to go after it. They wouldn't even be interested in such a small amount.Sure it would. 8 total years of American oil consumption would be worth a lot of money


MSM859: ".CFL's were transitional we are now going to LED's that can give you whatever light you want"

Have you seen the horrid light these LEDs put out? Yes, I have them in my house. For some rooms I like the warm color and other rooms I have put the cool bulbs with the more natural daylight look. It is nothing like incandescent lights. It's even worse than CFL light in terms of what it looks like. It's like something you would use in a haunted house at Halloween. I believe in freedom of choice. We as consumers should have the right to choose what lights we want to use. But the environmentalist movement is against freedom of choice.
You are free to do whatever you want as long as it doesn't negatively impact on others. How about if you didn't want to pay for garbage service so you decided to burn all of your garbage should you be able to do that? What if you changed your oil at home should you be able to dump your used oil in the stream behind you?
MSM859: "Even if that was true, getting 1/2 our electricity from renewables is a good start"

Oops! There has been a misunderstanding here. Not even the environmentalist's wildest dreams do wind and solar come anywhere close to producing 50% of our electricity. What I meant was that solar puts out a tiny amount of electricity roughly 50% of the day. It produces nothing at night. Wind turbines only work the wind is blowing, which unfortunately for Arizona anyways, it mainly during the winter months. During the summer, there is very little wind, so when we need the most electricity, they produce next to nothing. Coal plants produce 25 times MORE electricity than solar and wind farms. So, at best, solar and wind produce about 4% of our electricity. Not good, if you like using electricity.
As I said before, I don't have a problem using natural gas as a transitional source of energy until we can have more renewables. There is however, NO reason to continue with coal that pollutes at 3x the rate.



MSM859: "Chevrolet Volt is already averaging over 100mpg in real use. My son bought one 1 month ago despite a number of long distance trips - picked it up at home town and drove 500 miles he is averaging over 80 mpg. His 40 mile work commute he uses zero gas."


FOX News: "Even a $7,500 federal tax credit, which dropped the Volt's sticker price to $33,500, did little to promote sales. The car cost $7,000 more than the Leaf, and $13,000 above a well-equipped compact with a gas engine."

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/leisure/2012/...#ixzz27OUjltEB

Jeez! Even with today's gas prices, $13,000 could buy a lot of gas. So your son (and you) are paying a lot more to be green. And I have no problem with that if that is what you want to do, but I don't like people telling me what to do, and forcing me to pay more for "green" things, when I can barely afford to live with the way things are now.Except people are not cross shopping a Volt against an econo car. My son sold an Acura TSX a $29k car and bought a Volt - after rebates a $33k car. He will save at least $200/month in gas, payback is made in 20 months. But just imagine a United States were everyone had a car with that kind of gas mileage and then we really could be totally energy independent. We would not have had to waste $2 trillion on these wars the last 10 years. -- If you really want to talk about why your standard of living is being challenged.








I saw that story on 60 Minutes. Did you happen to notice the size of the natural gas pipe coming into the Apple data center? Most of their electricity is still being supplied by natural gas, which according to most environmentalists produces CO2 and is destroying our planet. Eventhough green leafy plants produce CO2 at night, when they switch from photosynthesis to aerobic respiration to meet their own energy needs to make it through the night. I have no problem with Apple doing whatever it wants to do to meet its own energy needs, but I would appreciate it if they would honest about it. Natural gas is supplying their energy needs, and I'm okay with that, but it does leave a carbon footprint. Not true. They are using the natural gas for a fuel cell - no carbon footprint. http://www.stationaryfuelcells.org/2...bon-footprint/ If they had no natural gas pipeline coming into their data center, and they ran everything with solar and wind, then I would say that renewables were an expensive, but viable option. But as you noticed, if you watched the 60 Minutes story, they like to claim to be green to sway the opinion of greenies who buy their products, but in reality, their still relying on good old carbon based energy to supply their building with enough electricity.

That's not what I have heard about the keystone pipeline. What I heard is that Canada was bound by the NAFTA agreement to sell the oil to us, if we built the keystone pipelineNot true. http://www.thedailybeast.com/article...as-to-u-s.html, but since we refused to build it, they are going to now build a pipeline across Canada to the Pacific and sell it to China. So, it is still going to be burned whether we burn it or not.


And telling China what it will or will not be allowed to do, won't go very far. They don't care what we think or say about them. They are going to do what is best for their own country, which unfortunately, we rarely do for our own country.

We may not be able to tell China what to do but we can certainly influence them by economic sanctions. I would not make it easier for them to get tar sand oil or coal. I suggest to you that moving to a greener economy will actually raise the standard of living for most people. My son may have bought the first generation Volt but that will hopefully set up a 2nd and 3rd generation which should only get more efficient and less expensive. Maybe 10 years from now the 3rd generation will only command a $2,000 premium and go over 200 miles on a single charge. Wouldn't you like that option?

[GoingDown]

The is shifting gears a bit, I would love to have people read this news article and watch the video, and then make your comments.

My nephews attend a similar school in Phoenix, and they were having so much trouble in a traditional school setting, but in their new school, they are thriving and making vast improvements. It may not be for everyone, but I think this is truly the wave of the future for education for most kids. Less teachers, more technology, and far less kids being bored out of their skulls, and then acting up in class. Most importantly, no more kids being held back by other students-- they all can learn and move forward at their own pace.

And this could really save on education costs for the state of Arizona going forward.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/48912833/ns/us_news-education_nation/t/arizona-desert-charter-school-computes/#.UGNeha7UA3U

[GoingDown]

Okay, no one was interested in that so back to the costs of going green.

Thank you, environmentalists, for making my electricity more expensive, now I have less money in my pocket to spend on everything else, and this effects most of the local businesses and government buildings around here, so they will just pass along the rising costs for electricity to me.

Thank you so much!

It really helps me to pay more for something as basic as electricity.

"PHOENIX (CBS5) -

Almost a million Valley residents who have their power or water service through SRP will see their utility bill go up beginning in November.

The SRP board of directors approved a 3.9 percent rate hike.

The increase is expected to generate an additional $100 million in revenue for the nonprofit public utility.

Company officials say the increase will help to fund reliable service, renewable resources and environmental upgrades.

The increase is effective beginning on the November billing cycle."

From S.R.P.:

"SRP needs to increase prices for these reasons:

Pay for new renewable energy sources. An increasing amount of the energy SRP delivers today is produced by solar, wind and geothermal sources. These sources are important to achieving sustainability goals but are more expensive than fossil fuel plants.

Complete required environmental upgrades. Mandatory improvements to Coronado Generating Station in St. Johns will enable us to further decrease emissions and continue to operate a lower-cost unit that supplies power to the Valley.

SRP has a mix of renewables such as wind, solar, geothermal and biomass energy, hydropower, conservation and energy-efficiency measures. We expect to spend $140.6 million this year and $184 million next year for sustainable sources and programs."

[jacko]

You'r welcome. Whenever there is a form of new technology and energy, prices start out high but gradually decreases. Nothing new. Dirty energy increases the cost of environmental clean up, rise in health care costs and loss productivity due to pollution/air quality.

Okay, no one was interested in that so back to the costs of going green.

Thank you, environmentalists, for making my electricity more expensive, now I have less money in my pocket to spend on everything else, and this effects most of the local businesses and government buildings around here, so they will just pass along the rising costs for electricity to me.

Thank you so much!

It really helps me to pay more for something as basic as electricity.

"PHOENIX (CBS5) -

Almost a million Valley residents who have their power or water service through SRP will see their utility bill go up beginning in November.

The SRP board of directors approved a 3.9 percent rate hike.

The increase is expected to generate an additional $100 million in revenue for the nonprofit public utility.

Company officials say the increase will help to fund reliable service, renewable resources and environmental upgrades.

The increase is effective beginning on the November billing cycle."

From S.R.P.:

"SRP needs to increase prices for these reasons:

Pay for new renewable energy sources. An increasing amount of the energy SRP delivers today is produced by solar, wind and geothermal sources. These sources are important to achieving sustainability goals but are more expensive than fossil fuel plants.

Complete required environmental upgrades. Mandatory improvements to Coronado Generating Station in St. Johns will enable us to further decrease emissions and continue to operate a lower-cost unit that supplies power to the Valley.

SRP has a mix of renewables such as wind, solar, geothermal and biomass energy, hydropower, conservation and energy-efficiency measures. We expect to spend $140.6 million this year and $184 million next year for sustainable sources and programs."

[Pjmax]

Sean Penn/Kid Rock "Americans"

http://m.youtube.com/#/watch?v=oSQJ2...%3DoSQJ2ULuhb8